sustainability reporting and reputation risk management an australian case study

Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management: an Australian case study

Abstract: purpose -the purpose of this paper is to explore the ways in which a leading australian public company uses sustainability reporting to respond to reputation risk arising from proposed regulation. design/methodology/approach -the paper uses a case study approach and both qualitative and quantitative methods of content analysis. the qualitative component is based on a framework of reputation conceptualisations and image restoration strategies adopted from existing literature. findings -the key findings of this … show more.

Search citation statements

Paper Sections

Citation Types

Year Published

Publication Types

Relationship

Cited by 63 publication s

References 18 publication s, climate change accounting and the australian mining industry: exploring the links between corporate disclosure and the generation of legitimacy.

No abstract

The Influence of the Sustainability Logic on Carbon Disclosure in the Global Logistics Industry: The Case of DHL, FDX and UPS

As a significant contributor to carbon emissions, global logistics companies are under scrutiny from various stakeholders, and respond by disclosing carbon-related information in the form of carbon reports. Carbon disclosure is, however, a mainly voluntary practice that allows for a broad range of interpretation from the management field, which leads to different approaches to the measurement and reporting of carbon-related information. From a theoretical perspective, these different carbon-disclosure approaches in global logistics companies can be attributed to the underlying construct of competing logics, namely the market and the sustainability logic. While competing logics are frequently discussed in the current literature, little is known about their influence on shaping carbon-disclosure practices. The aim of this paper is to examine the similarities and differences in the measurement and reporting of carbon-related information in order to capture the underlying logic that drives carbon-disclosure behaviour in the global logistics industry. We adopt an interpretative content analysis approach and examine the carbon-related information using the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) reports of DHL, FDX and UPS. The analysis reveals significant differences in the applied carbon-disclosure strategies, as well as in the degree of transparency between the three companies. The results also indicate that the carbon-disclosure practices of FDX are dominated by a market logic that emphasizes the economic benefits of carbon reductions, while DHL and UPS have prioritized the sustainability logic to gain a competitive advantage.

Reputation, Game Theory and Entrepreneurial Sustainability

Abstract:This manuscript provides a novel approach to reputational management as a driver of entrepreneurial sustainability, using game theory to integrate three dimensions of reputation. First, if the entrepreneur perceives reputation as a risk source, the analysis is framed as a prisoner's dilemma schema that is solved by protecting against reputational threats from entrepreneurial sustainability. Second, if the entrepreneur perceives reputation as a competitive advantage, the analysis is framed as an innovator's dilemma that is solved by getting reputational opportunities from entrepreneurial sustainability. Third, if reputation is perceived as a strategic asset, the analysis is framed as a coordination game schema that results in the development of a reputational intelligence skill that has the potential to become crucial for success in entrepreneurial sustainability. Consequently, this manuscript provides an original multidisciplinary analysis of reputational management by relating well-known theoretical results from game theory to organizational realities.

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

[email protected]

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

• Help & FAQ

Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management: An Australian case study

Research output : Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the ways in which a leading Australian public company uses sustainability reporting to respond to reputation risk arising from proposed regulation. Design/methodology/approach: The paper uses a case study approach and both qualitative and quantitative methods of content analysis. The qualitative component is based on a framework of reputation conceptualisations and image restoration strategies adopted from existing literature. Findings: The key findings of this paper are that the concept of reputation risk management (RRM) could assist in understanding what motivates sustainability reporting, and how proposed regulation could lead to a decrease in the quantity but increase in the quality of sustainability reporting. In addition, "honesty" is revealed as a potential RRM strategy. Originality/value: The paper extends existing research on the RRM thesis by studying an Australian case of a reputation-damaging event over a number of reporting years, examining a range of sustainability reporting media, and adding a quantitative aspect to an otherwise qualitative research framework.

Access to Document

• 10.1108/18347641111169269

Other files and links

• Link to publication in Scopus

Fingerprint

• Public Company Social Sciences 100%

T1 - Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management

T2 - An Australian case study

AU - Hogan, Janine

AU - Lodhia, Sumit

N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the ways in which a leading Australian public company uses sustainability reporting to respond to reputation risk arising from proposed regulation. Design/methodology/approach: The paper uses a case study approach and both qualitative and quantitative methods of content analysis. The qualitative component is based on a framework of reputation conceptualisations and image restoration strategies adopted from existing literature. Findings: The key findings of this paper are that the concept of reputation risk management (RRM) could assist in understanding what motivates sustainability reporting, and how proposed regulation could lead to a decrease in the quantity but increase in the quality of sustainability reporting. In addition, "honesty" is revealed as a potential RRM strategy. Originality/value: The paper extends existing research on the RRM thesis by studying an Australian case of a reputation-damaging event over a number of reporting years, examining a range of sustainability reporting media, and adding a quantitative aspect to an otherwise qualitative research framework.

AB - Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the ways in which a leading Australian public company uses sustainability reporting to respond to reputation risk arising from proposed regulation. Design/methodology/approach: The paper uses a case study approach and both qualitative and quantitative methods of content analysis. The qualitative component is based on a framework of reputation conceptualisations and image restoration strategies adopted from existing literature. Findings: The key findings of this paper are that the concept of reputation risk management (RRM) could assist in understanding what motivates sustainability reporting, and how proposed regulation could lead to a decrease in the quantity but increase in the quality of sustainability reporting. In addition, "honesty" is revealed as a potential RRM strategy. Originality/value: The paper extends existing research on the RRM thesis by studying an Australian case of a reputation-damaging event over a number of reporting years, examining a range of sustainability reporting media, and adding a quantitative aspect to an otherwise qualitative research framework.

KW - Australia

KW - Corporate image

KW - Public companies

KW - Reputation

KW - Risk management

KW - Sustainability

KW - Sustainability reporting

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81255210853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/18347641111169269

DO - 10.1108/18347641111169269

M3 - Article

SN - 1834-7649

JO - International Journal of Accounting and Information Management

JF - International Journal of Accounting and Information Management

Stakeholder Engagement in Sustainability Reporting: Evidence of Reputation Risk Management in Large Australian Companies

• September 2019
• Australian Accounting Review 29(4):726-747
• 29(4):726-747

• Udayana University

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Mirela Păunescu
• Muhummad Khairul Islam

• Frank Schiemann
• MOHD HALIM KADRI
• Raja Adzrin Raja Ahmad
• Rubina Michela Galeotti

• Prof Onyebuchi
• Orji-Okafor
• Aisyah Wahyuni Suheri
• J Int Account Audit Taxat

• Chaoyuan She
• Ni Putu Manik Julythiawati
• Putu Agus Ardiana
• Lavoisiene Rodrigues De Lima

• J BUS ETHICS

• Manuel Núñez-Nickel

• Iris Borowy
• Account Audit Account J

• Market Intell Plann
• Nivea Blackburn

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Professor Sumit Lodhia

• Professor UniSA Business
• City West Campus (WL4-68)
• tel +61 8 830 27379
• email [email protected]
• Available for media comment
• Research Degree Supervisor
• External engagement & recognition
• Teaching & student supervision

Sumit Lodhia is a Professor of Accounting in UniSA Business where he leads research focused on sustainability accounting, reporting, and governance. Sumit was presented with the annual Australasian - Centre for Social and Environmental Accounting (A-CSEAR) Hall of Fame Award for 2017.  The award is given to researchers who show leadership and a significant  contribution to research on sustainability accounting and reporting. For the last four years, Professor Lodhia has been ranked in  the top 2% of cited researchers globally (Stanford University Top 2% World Scientist Ranking). 

Sumit has completed a Bachelor of Arts (BA) and Master of Arts (MA) at the University of the South... Read more

UniSA Business

Recognised and respected for our quality education, career outcomes and research expertise, UniSA Business creates leaders for change and transforms modern business practice.

• Google Scholar
• ResearcherID

Sumit has completed a Bachelor of Arts (BA) and Master of Arts (MA) at the University of the South Pacific, and a PhD from the Australian National University (ANU). He has published over 80 articles in a range of prestigious refereed journals and authored a book and several research reports. He is an associate editor  of Meditari Accountancy Research and  a member of the Editorial Board of several international journals.

Sumit has been awarded grants from the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA), the Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand (AFAANZ), Chartered Accountants of Australia and New Zealand (CAANZ) and CPA Australia, to support and continue his industry relevant research. He has presented his research at conferences nationally and internationally. Professor Lodhia is often a mentor at PhD colloquia associated with various conferences and has been/is on the technical committee for the AFAANZ and A-CSEAR conferences. He serves on the AFAANZ Board. Sumit is the author of the “Qualitative Pitch”, a research template for pitching qualitative research ideas.

Sumit has strong links to industry, enabling him to research the sustainability accounting practices of major Australian organisations, both public and private, and he applies his academic research through his teaching, lecturing on sustainability and management accounting at undergraduate and postgraduate levels, mentoring lecturers and supervising PhD and Masters students.

Professional Associations

• CPA (2008-)
• CAANZ (2016-)
• Accounting Association of Australia and New Zealand (1999-current)
• Centre for Social and Environmental Accounting Research (1999-current)
• In the media

Qualifications

Doctor of Philosophy Australian National University

Master of Arts (Accounting and Financial Management) University of the South Pacific

Postgraduate Diploma in Accounting & Financial Management University of the South Pacific

Bachelor of Arts University of the South Pacific

Work history

• April 5th 2020 - current, Professor of Accounting, UniSA Business.
• Jan 2019 - April 4th 2020 - Professor of Accounting, School of Commerce, UniSA Business School. 
• Jan 2017- April 2020 - Director, Centre for Sustainability Governance ,School of Commerce, UniSA Business School
• April , 2014-December 2016 - Director, Centre for Accounting, Governance and Sustainability,School of Commerce, UniSA Business School
• April , 2013– December 2018 - Associate Professor in Accounting, School of Commerce, UniSA Business School
• Feb 2010 – April , 2013 Senior Lecturer in Accounting,  School of Commerce, UniSA
•  Jan 2005 – Feb, 2010 Lecturer in Accounting and Information Systems, School of Accounting and Business Information Systems, Australian National University.
• July 2001- December2004 Associate Lecturer in Accounting and Information Systems, School of Business and Information Management,Australian National University
• July 2000 – July 2001 Lecturer in Accounting and Information Systems, Central Queensland University, Fiji International Campus
• Feb 1998 – July 2000 Tutor in Accounting and Financial Management, University of the South Pacific
• Jan 1997 – Feb 1998 Graduate Assistant in Computing Science,University of the South Pacific 
• Professional associations

Research focus

• Accounting, Auditing and Accountability
• Business and Management
• Banking, Finance and Investment
• Applied Economics
• Policy and Administration
• Social, environmental and sustainability management, accounting and accountability, and reporting (includes carbon/climate change accounting and pricing)
•  Integrated Reporting
•  Corporate Communication with a focus on use of new media such as the world wide web, social media and virtual reality technologies
•  Sustainability and the Mining industry
•  Corporate Social Responsibility
•  Accounting (especially Sustainability) education
•  Accounting (especially sustainability accounting) in developing countries

Excludes commercial-in-confidence projects.

Research outputs for the last seven years are shown below. Some long-standing staff members may have older outputs included. To see earlier years visit ORCID , ResearcherID or Scopus

Open access indicates that an output is open access.

Journal Articles

Conferences

Other outputs

Sandhu, S, Crocker, R and Lodhia, S (2020) “What makes people switch to reusable cups? It’s not discounts, it’s what others do” The Conversation https://theconversation.com/what-makes-people-switch-to-reusable-cups-its-not-discounts-its-what-others-do-142254

• Current research & highlights
• Collaborations

• Associate  Editor - Meditari Accountancy Research.
• Editorial board member - Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal, Sustainability Management, Accounting and Policy Journal,  Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, Journal of Accounting and Organisational Change, Pacific Accounting Review, International Journal of Accounting
• AFAANZ Board member. 
• Member of Chartered Accountants of Australia and New Zealand (CAANZ) Sustainability Management Advisory Committee 
• Top 2% of cited researchers in Accounting (2019,2020)
• Visiting Academic (Waikato University, 2019, Lincoln University, 2019, University of Kelaniya, 2018, University of the South Pacific, 2018, 2019, University of Tasmania, 2017,2018, 2019, Auckland University of Technology, 2015)
• Technical committee member at conferences (AFAANZ, A-Csear, Csear), Mentor at Phd colloquia (Apira, A-Csear, AFAANZ, Meditari)
• Assessor for South Africa’s National Research Foundation (NRF)
• Peer Reviewer for research project applications for the Università di Bologna, Italy
• Mining Special Issue Managing Guest Editor for Journal of  Cleaner Prodution (2014)
• Co-editor of Asia Pacific Centre for Environmental Accountability Journal (2008-2012)
• KeyNote Speaker (University of Lampung International Conference on Social Science,Sustainability Accounting Research Network, International Conference for Accounting Reseachers and Educators, International Conference on Emerging Accounting Issues, CPA conferences, ACsear emerging scholars colloqium)
• Best Research paper (Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, International Conference on Governance and Accountability)

Provided research advice to staff during visits to the Czech Technical University, Prague Czech Republic (June 16-20, 2014) and Università di Bologna, Italy (October 14-25, 2013). This visit was funded by the joint initiative of the European Union and the Australian Federal Government to foster mutual understanding in relation to Sustainability Management for Business, Organisations and Governments (SMOG).

Teaching & student supervision

Teaching strengths

• Sustainability Accounting and Reporting
• Management Accounting
• Sustainability Accounting and Reporting,
• Corporate Social Responsibility,
• Management Accounting,
• Management Control Systems,Financial Accounting (Mainly first year),
• Accounting for non-accountants,
• Accounting Theory,
• Accounting Information Systems, Business Information Systems, E-business
• Ethics and Corporate Governance
• Qualitative Research Methods
• Courses and programs

Courses I teach

• ACCT 3010 Sustainability Accounting and Reporting (2024)
• ACCT 3010 Sustainability Accounting and Reporting (2023)
• Research degree supervision

Supervisions from 2010 shown

• DOI: 10.1108/18347641111169269
• Corpus ID: 153337455

Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management: an Australian case study

• Janine Hogan , Sumit K. Lodhia
• Published 20 September 2011
• Environmental Science, Business
• International Journal of Accounting and Information Management

73 Citations

Reputational risk and sustainability: a bibliometric analysis of relevant literature, stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting: evidence of reputation risk management in large australian companies, the influence of sustainability reporting in enhancing firm value, corporate social responsibility reporting: meeting stakeholders expectations or efficient allocation of resources, sustainability accounting and reporting in the mining industry: current literature and directions for future research, sustainability and firm valuation: an international investigation, corporate social responsibility disclosures and reputation risk management post the banking royal commission: a study of the big four banks, supporting strategic success through enterprise-wide reputation risk management, determinants of sustainability reporting and its impact on firm value: evidence from the emerging market of turkey, reputational risk: a bibliometric review of relevant literature, 18 references, corporate social reporting and reputation risk management, a survey of sustainability reporting practices of australian reporting entities, socially responsible investment and corporate social and environmental reporting in the uk: an exploratory study, strategic reputation risk management and corporate social responsibility reporting, the externalities in social environmental accounting, a commentary on: corporate social responsibility reporting and reputation risk management, corporate responses in an emerging climate regime: the institutionalization and commensuration of carbon disclosure, methodological issues ‐ reflections on quantification in corporate social reporting content analysis, social and environmental accountability research: a view from the commentary box, carbon trading: accounting and reporting issues, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Sustainability Reporting in Australian Universities: Case Study of Campus Sustainability Employing Institutional Analysis

• First Online: 26 October 2019

Cite this chapter

• Gavin Melles 5  

Part of the book series: World Sustainability Series ((WSUSE))

1594 Accesses

4 Citations

In an era of climate change and greater demands for organisational commitment, the global university sector has taken up sustainability reporting in a modest fashion. Recent studies of the sector show extensive variation in coverage and quality of reporting even by comparison to the corporate sector. From a materiality point of view, sustainability reporting is an aspect of environmental management that aims via efficiency actions to reduce GHG emissions. Recent studies and reports criticise the Australian University sector for its lack of transparency and modest accomplishments in campus sustainability compared to the corporate sector and other regions. This study examines these claims and introduces organisational theory of institutions as a justification for the strategies and tactics adopted by the sector. Existing sector studies and reports have rarely employed organisational theory and preferred unrepresentative samples and definitions of reporting and scope, albeit admittedly due to the poor public availability of environmental and other data. This short case study combines desk analysis of publicly available Australian University sustainability reports, strategy plans, compliance reports of energy and water, built environment initiatives, and qualitative interviews with five (The interview component, which is on-going, has currently recruited and interviewed twenty participants. This study incorporates analysis of the first five interviews completed at the time of writing.) past and current campus sustainability managers and officers from the Australian University sector to (1) show the current state of reporting and commitment and (2) demonstrate the value of the organisational theory approach. The study finds that organisational theory is the missing theoretical lens to help explain why compliance rather than commitment and legitimacy claims in a context of weak national and sector expectations explains the varied leadership and commitment in this region. Reporting on the initial analysis of sources, this study identifies the concept of transparency and accountability across the academic and professional divide as key to understanding a sector compliance approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The Important Role of Universities in Enhancing Sustainability: The Case of the University of Milano-Bicocca

Developing a University Sustainability Report: Experiences from the University of Leeds

Triple Bottom Line: An Academic Perspective on Sustainability Practices and Accountability

Note that Gray suggests that labelling triple bottom line reporting or TBL as equivalent to sustainability reporting is inaccurate.

According to an IFC World Bank Presentation, available at https://www.povertyactionlab.org/sites/default/files/documents/Day2_Sustainability_Reporting.pdf .

See http://100percentrenewables.com.au/universities-demonstrating-sustainable-energy-leadership/ .

https://theconversation.com/australias-universities-are-not-walking-the-talk-on-going-low-carbon-72411 .

See Talloires Network https://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/ .

Parliamentary report available at https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Browse_by_Topic/ClimateChangeold/responses/economic/sustainability .

There is a tendency in the literature to favour either legitimacy theory or stakeholder theory to explain sustainability reporting but in fact, institutional theory of organisations already alludes to both as factors in the tactics and strategic aims of organisations.

The nine aspects are: materials, energy, water, biodiversity, emissions and waste, products and services, compliance, transport and overall. And see https://www.globalreporting.org/Pages/default.aspx for details and standards.

A recent (Indonesian) initiative with two participants from Australia, see http://greenmetric.ui.ac.id/ .

Promoted by ACTS and adapted from the UK—materiality is one of four dimensions.

See https://www.acts.asn.au/ the association recruits in NZ and Australia.

See http://ap-unsdsn.org/ . The organisation aims to promote SDG implementation and funds projects, e.g. decarbonisation pathways modelling. Targets and membership are voluntary. It recruits academic rather than professional staff and projects.

The business management preference for stakeholder theory and values is also less relevant to the strategic approach of organisations as ‘players’ in an institutional environment relative to sustainability demands.

The term aspirational here is used to define commitments that are not measured.

See https://life.acts.asn.au/ .

See https://www.tefma.com/ —restricted password access to benchmarking reports.

See https://stars.aashe.org/ .

See http://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/NGER/About-the-National-Greenhouse-and-Energy-Reporting-scheme/Greenhouse-gases-and-energy for details.

https://www.cm.uwa.edu.au/_data/assets/image/0012/3077769/CM-sustainability-graph-energy-2016.jpg .

See recently https://www.pv-magazine-australia.com/2018/11/10/long-read-from-rooftops-to-innovative-ppa-structures-australias-universities-go-solar/ .

The government website and conditions can be seen here https://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/government/carbon-neutral .

As in Murdoch University Environmental Sustainability Charter and Strategy 2014–2017.

The G08 is a sub-sector grouping of eight ‘research intensive’ universities in Australia, https://go8.edu.au/ .

UTAS appears to have achieved carbon neutrality largely through off-sets abroad and domestically but also through campus efficiencies. http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/government/carbon-neutral/certified-businesses/university-tasmania .

CSU offset projects in Australia, India and China can be seen here https://www.csu.edu.au/csugreen/about-us/carbon-neutral-university/offset-projects .

See https://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/government/carbon-neutral/certification .

It si notable that UTAS in its carbon neutral disclosure for 2017 shows that scope 3 emissions for 2015–2017 are approximately double its scope 1 and 2 emissions. This is also the case for UQ in their annual report, which lists scope 1–3 emissions, see http://www.uq.edu.au/about/docs/annualreport/annual-report-17/10_ManagementAndResources.pdf . Hence current compulsory sector reporting of scope 1 and 2 could be doubled to get an approximate fuller account.

See https://www.monash.edu/news/articles/monash-to-become-australias-first-100-per-cent-renewable-energy-powered-university .

See https://ourcampus.unimelb.edu.au/sustainability .

See https://www.newcastle.edu.au/newsroom/featured-news/first-australian-university-to-sign-100-renewable-electricity-contract .

See https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/business/sustainable-business/mrep/Pages/melbourne-renewable-energy-project.aspx .

See https://life.acts.asn.au/about-life/ . It appears Charles Sturt University (CSU), James Cook University (JCU) and Macquarie University use this. LiFe appears to be somewhat popular in Europe, see https://www.eauc.org.uk/the_life_index_whole_institution_engagement .

Available at https://www.globalreporting.org/Pages/default.aspx —we exclude from the list the sustainable campus group entry and only include individual organisations.

See https://www.accountability.org/standards/ .

Curitn University also seems to have followed this path but their website provides no data.

Gritth University refer to a carbon management plan but it is not publicly available.

Project directory accessed 20/02/19 https://new.gbca.org.au/green-star-projects/ . The rating system and details are not discussed here in detail. Scoring for 1–3 is not awarded and the stars have scores: 4 (45–59); 5 (60–74) and 6 (76+).

There are discussions at present to match GBCA rating system with the National Construction Code (NCC) energy requirements.

https://www.nabers.gov.au/ for NABERS rating processes etc.

Guidelines for Carbon Neutrality Certification are at http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/government/carbon-neutral/certification .

See https://www.acts.asn.au/ .

See https://greenimpact.acts.asn.au/ .

See http://www.utas.edu.au/infrastructure-services-development/sustainability/SIPS .

See https://www.adelaide.edu.au/ecoversity/action/internships/ .

See https://www.jcu.edu.au/tropeco-sustainability-in-action .

Adams CA (2013) Sustainability reporting and performance management in universities: challenges and benefits. Sustain Acc Manage Policy J 4:384–392. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-12-2012-0044

Article   Google Scholar  

Alvesson M, Ashcraft KL (2012) Interviews. In: Qualitative organizational research: core methods and current challenges. SAGE Publications, Inc., London, EC1Y 1SP, pp 239–257. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526435620.n14

Arroyo P (2012) Management accounting change and sustainability: an institutional approach. J Acc Org Change 8:286–309. https://doi.org/10.1108/18325911211258317

Azizi L, Bien C, Sassen R (2018) Recent trends in sustainability reporting by German universities. NachhaltigkeitsManagementForum|Sustainability Management Forum. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00550-018-0469-8

Baer HA, Gallois A (2018) How committed are Australian universities to environmental sustainability? A perspective on and from the University of Melbourne. Crit Sociol 44:357–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920516680857

Bebbington J, Higgins C, Frame B (2009) Initiating sustainable development reporting: evidence from New Zealand. Acc Audit Acc J 22. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570910955452

Bekessy SA, Samson K, Clarkson RE (2007) The failure of non-binding declarations to achieve university sustainability. Int J Sustain Higher Educ 8:301–316. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370710817165

Berthod O (2016) Institutional theory of organizations. In: Farazmand A (ed) Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy, and governance. Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, pp 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_63-1

Beynaghi A, Trencher G, Moztarzadeh F, Mozafari M, Maknoon R, Leal W (2016) Future sustainability scenarios for universities : moving beyond the United Nations decade of education for sustainable development. J Clean Prod 112:3464–3478. (Elsevier Ltd). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.117

Birks M, Chapman Y, Francis K (2008) Memoing in qualitative research: probing data and processes. J Res Nurs 13:68–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987107081254

Brown, HS, de Jong M, Levy DL (2009b) Building institutions based on information disclosure: lessons from GRI’s sustainability reporting. J Clean Prod 17:571–580 (Elsevier Ltd). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.12.009

Brown HS, de Jong M, Lessidrenska T (2009) The rise of the global reporting initiative: a case of institutional entrepreneurship. Environ Polit 18:182–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010802682551

Brusca I, Labrador M, Larran M (2018) The challenge of sustainability and integrated reporting at universities: a case study. J Clean Prod 188:347–354 (Elsevier Ltd.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.292

Buhr N, Gray R, Milne, MJ (2014) Histories, rationales, voluntary standards and future prospects for sustainability reporting: CSR, GRI, IIRC and beyond. In: Gibassier D, Unerman J (eds) Sustainability accounting and acocuntability, 2nd ed. Routledge, London, pp 51–71. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1026216110583

Ceulemans K, Molderez I, Van Liedekerke L (2015) Sustainability reporting in higher education: a comprehensive review of the recent literature and paths for further research. J Clean Prod 106:127–143 (Elsevier Ltd.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.052

Chang HC, Deegan C (2009) Environmental management accounting and environmental accountability within universities: current practice and future potential. In: Environmental management accounting for cleaner production, vol 24. Springer Science & Business Media B.V., pp 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8913-8_16

Chatelain-Ponroy S, Morin-Delerm S (2016) Adoption of sustainable development reporting by universities: an analysis of French first-time reporters. Acc Audit Acc J 29:887–918. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2014-1720

Chen Q, Zuo J, Xia Bo, Skitmore M, Pullen S (2013) Green star points obtained by australian building projects. J Arch Eng 19:302–308. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ae.1943-5568.0000121

Cho CH, Laine M, Roberts RW, Rodrigue M (2015) Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting. Accounting, organizations and society 40. Elsevier Ltd., pp 78–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2014.12.003

Christie BA, Miller KK, Cooke R, White JG (2015a). Environmental sustainability in higher education: what do academics think? In: Environmental Education Research, vol 21. Routledge, pp 655–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.879697

Christie BA, Miller KK, Cooke R, White JG (2015b) Environmental sustainability in higher education: what do academics think? Environ Educ Res 21:655–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.879697

Connell R (2013) The neoliberal cascade and education: an essay on the market agenda and its consequences. Critic Stud Educ 54:99–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2013.776990

Corcoran PB, Walker KE, Wals AEJ, Walker KE (2004) Case studies, make your case studies, and case stories: a critique of case study methodology in sustainability in higher education. Environ Educ Res 10:7–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462032000173670

Disterheft A, Caeiro S, Azeiteiro UM, Filho WL (2015) Sustainable universities—a study of critical success factors for participatory approaches. J Clean Prod 106:11–21 (Elsevier Ltd.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.030

Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad Manage Rev 14:532. https://doi.org/10.2307/258557

Fernandez-Feijoo B, Romero S, Ruiz S (2012) Transparent information system for sustainability. Sect Anal Procedia Technol 5:31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2012.09.004

Fernandez-Feijoo B, Romero S, Ruiz S (2014) Effect of stakeholders’ pressure on transparency of sustainability reports within the GRI framework. J Bus Eth 122:53–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1748-5

Ferrero-Ferrero I, Fernández-Izquierdo MA, Muñoz-Torres MJ, Bellés-Colomer L (2018) Stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting in higher education: an analysis of key internal stakeholders’ expectations. Int J Sustain Higher Educ 19:313–336. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-06-2016-0116

Flint K (2001) Institutional ecological footprint analysis—a case study of the University of Newcastle, Australia. Int J Sustain Higher Educ 2:48–62. https://doi.org/10.1108/1467630110380299

Fonseca A, Macdonald A, Dandy E, Valenti P (2011) The state of sustainability reporting at Canadian universities. Int J Sustain Higher Educ 12:22–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676371111098285

Gamage P, Sciulli N (2017) Sustainability reporting by Australian universities. Aust J Public Admin 76:187–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12215

Glover JL, Champion D, Daniels KJ, Dainty AJD (2014) An institutional theory perspective on sustainable practices across the dairy supply chain. Int J Prod Econ 152:102–111 (Elsevier). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.12.027

Glover A, Strengers Y, Lewis T (2017) The unsustainability of academic aeromobility in Australian universities. Sustain Sci Pract Policy 13:1–12 (Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group). https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2017.1388620

Gray R (2011) Reporting and accounting. In: Brady J, Ebbage A, Lunn R (eds) Environmental management in organizations: the IEMA handbook, 2nd ed. Earthscan, Abingdon

Google Scholar  

Guthrie J, Farneti F (2008) Public money and management GRI sustainability reporting by Australian public sector organizations. Public Money Manage 28:361–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9302.2008.00670.x

Hahn R, Kühnen M (2013) Determinants of sustainability reporting: a review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. J Clean Prod 59:5–21 (Elsevier Ltd.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.005

Hahn R, Reimsbach D, Schiemann F (2015) Organizations, climate change, and transparency: reviewing the literature on carbon disclosure. Org Environ 28:80–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575542

Hancock L, Nuttman S (2014) Engaging higher education institutions in the challenge of sustainability: sustainable transport as a catalyst for action. J Clean Prod 62:62–71 (Elsevier Ltd.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.062

Higgins B, Thomas I (2016) Education for sustainability in universities: challenges and opportunities for change. Aust J Environ Educ 32:91–108. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2015.56

Higgins C, Milne MJ, van Gramberg B (2015) The uptake of sustainability reporting in Australia. J Bus Eth 129:445–468 (Springer Netherlands). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2171-2

Hodgson GM (2007) Institutions and individuals: interaction and evolution. Org Stud 28:95–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607067832

Holstein J, Gubrium J (1995) The active interview. SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, California, USA. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412986120

Iarossi J, Miller JK, O’Connor J, Keil M (2013a) Addressing the sustainability challenge: insights from institutional theory and organizational learning. J Leadersh Acc Eth 10:76–91. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1839802

Iarossi J, Miller JK, O’Connor J, Keil M (2013b) Addressing the sustainability challenge: insights from institutional theory and organizational learning. J Leadersh Acc Eth 10:76–91. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1839802

Jensen JC, Berg N (2012) Determinants of traditional sustainability reporting versus integrated reporting. an institutionalist approach. Bus Strateg Environ 21:299–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.740

Jones M (2014) Researching organizations: the practice of organisational fieldwork. SAGE Publications, London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi

Book   Google Scholar  

Larrán Jorge M, Andrades Peña FJ, Madueño JH (2018) An analysis of university sustainability reports from the GRI database: an examination of influential variables. J Environ Plan Manage 0568:1–26 (Taylor & Francis). https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2018.1457952

Lee B (2012) Using documents in organizational research. In: Qualitative organizational research: core methods and current challenges. SAGE Publications, Inc., London EC1Y 1SP, pp 389–407 https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526435620.n22

Lee KH, Barker M, Mouasher A (2013) Is it even espoused? An exploratory study of commitment to sustainability as evidenced in vision, mission, and graduate attribute statements in Australian universities. J Clean Prod 48:20–28 (Elsevier Ltd.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.01.007

Leviston Z, Greenhill M, Walker I (2014) Australian attitudes to climate change and adaptation: 2010–2014. Canberra, ACT. https://doi.org/10.4225/08/584af21158fe9

Li X, Strezov V, Amati M (2013) A qualitative study of motivation and influences for academic green building developments in Australian universities. J Green Build 8:166–183. https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.8.3.166

Liu Z, Abhayawansa S, Jubb C, Perera L (2017) Regulatory impact on voluntary climate change–related reporting by Australian government-owned corporations. Financ Acc Manage 33:264–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12124

Livesey SM, Kearins K (2002) Transparent and caring corporations? Org Environ 15:233–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026602153001

Lozano R, Lozano FJ, Mulder K, Huisingh D, Waas T (2013) Advancing higher education for sustainable development: international insights and critical reflections. J Clean Prod 48:3–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.03.034

Lozano R, Ceulemans K, Alonso-Almeida M, Huisingh D, Lozano FJ, Waas T, Lambrechts W, Lukman R, Hugé J (2015) A review of commitment and implementation of sustainable development in higher education: results from a worldwide survey. J Clean Prod 108:1–18 (Elsevier Ltd.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.048

Mcmillin J, Dyball R (2009) Developing a whole-of-university approach to educating for sustainability. J Educ Sustain Dev 3:55–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/097340820900300113

Meyer JW (2017) Reflections on institutional theories of organizations. In Greenwood R, Oliver C, Lawrence TB, Meyer RE (eds) The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, 2nd ed. SAGE Publications Ltd, London, New York, pp 788–809

Meyer JW, Ramirez F, Frank DJ, Schofer E (2006) Higher education as an institution. In: Gumport Patricia J (ed) Sociology of higher education: contributions and their contexts. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 187–221

Mitchell LM (2010) Energy efficient cities. In: Bose RK (ed) Energy efficient cities: assessment tools and benchmarking practices. The World Bank, Washington DC. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-8104-5

Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ (2017) Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int J Qual Methods 16:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

Oliver C (1991) Strategic responses to institutional processes. Acad Manage Rev 16:145–179. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4279002

Olssen M, Peters MA (2005) Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: from the free market to knowledge capitalism. J Educ Policy 20:313–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930500108718

Perez-Batres LA, Miller VV, Pisani MJ (2011) Institutionalizing sustainability: an empirical study of corporate registration and commitment to the United Nations global compact guidelines. J Clean Prod 19:843–851 (Elsevier Ltd.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.06.003

Ralph M, Stubbs W (2014) Integrating environmental sustainability into universities. Higher Educ 67:71–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9641-9

Ramirez M (2015) Commitments of university leaders to the talloires declaration: are they evidenced in industrial design teaching and learning? In: Filho WL, Brandli L, Kuznetsova O, Paço A (eds) Integrative approaches to sustainable development at University Leve. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 225–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10690-8_16

Riedy C, Daly J (2010) Targeting a low-carbon university: a greenhouse gas reduction target for the australian technology network of universities. In: Filho WL (ed) Universities and climate change. Springer, Cham, pp 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10751-1_12

Sassen R, Azizi L (2017) Voluntary disclosure of sustainability reports by Canadian universities. J Bus Econ 88:97–137 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-017-0869-1

Scott WR (2008) Approaching adulthood: the maturing of institutional theory. Theory Soc 37:427–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-008-9067-z

Sherren K (2006) Core issues: reflections on sustainability in Australian University coursework programs. Int J Sustain Higher Educ 7:400–413. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370610702208

Sinkovics RR, Alfoldi EA (2012) Facilitating the interaction between theory and data in qualitative research using CAQDAS. In Qualitative organizational research: core methods and current challenges. SAGE Publications, Inc.,, London EC1Y 1SP, pp 109–131. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526435620.n7

Stefanova K, Menzies L, Connor J (2016) Climate of the Nation 2016: Australian attitudes on climate change. Sydney, NSW. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107415324.004

Stubbs W, Higgins C (2014) Integrated reporting and internal mechanisms of change. Acc Audit Acc J 27:1068–1089. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2013-1279

Suddaby R, Lefsrud L (2010) Institutional theory, old and new. In Mills A, Durepos G, Wiebe E, (ed) Encyclopedia of case study research. SAGE Publications, Inc., California, United States, pp 465–473. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412957397

Symon G, Cassell C (2012) Qualitative organizational research: core methods and current challenges. SAGE Publications, Inc., London EC1Y 1SP. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526435620

The Reporting Exchange (2018) Sustainability reporting in Australia: jumping into the mainstream

Timmermans S, Tavory I (2012) Theory construction in qualitative research. Sociol Theory 30:167–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275112457914

Vaughter P, Wright T, Herbert Y (2015) 50 shades of green: an examination of sustainability policy on Canadian campuses. Can J Higher Educ 45:81–100 (Manuscript in press)

Vermeulen WJV, Bootsma MC, Tijm M (2014) Higher education level teaching of (master’s) programmes in sustainable development: analysis of views on prerequisites and practices based on a worldwide survey. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 21:430–448 (Taylor & Francis). https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2014.944956

World Wildlife Foundation (2018) Australian attitudes to nature 2017

Zucker LG (1987) Institutional theories of organization. Ann Rev Sociol 13

Zuo J, Zhao ZY (2014) Green building research-current status and future agenda: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 30:271–281 (Elsevier). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.021

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Design, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia

Gavin Melles

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gavin Melles .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

European School of Sustainability Science and Research, HAW Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Walter Leal Filho

College of Business, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Paulo R. Borges de Brito

Universidade Positivo, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

Fernanda Frankenberger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Melles, G. (2020). Sustainability Reporting in Australian Universities: Case Study of Campus Sustainability Employing Institutional Analysis. In: Leal Filho, W., Borges de Brito, P., Frankenberger, F. (eds) International Business, Trade and Institutional Sustainability. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26759-9_56

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26759-9_56

Published : 26 October 2019

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-26758-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-26759-9

eBook Packages : Earth and Environmental Science Earth and Environmental Science (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Journal Proposal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Sustainability management accounting in urban development: a case study of an egyptian state-owned enterprise.

1. Introduction

2. literature review, 3. the egyptian context, 4. theoretical framework, 5. methodology, 6. analysis, 6.1. broader urban development pressures for sustainability management accounting.

Before the revolution, characterised by corruption, favouritism, mediation, and dubious political relationships, the public sector’s SOEs were without a dependable management accounting system to oversee and regulate the corporate sustainability KPIs mandated by the government. The NAG’s antiquated management accounting system, although computerised, was not interconnected across the various corporate and governmental strata engaged in national urban development projects. This lack of networking facilitated frequent manipulations by both veteran NAG executives and high-ranking ministry officials, leading to chaos in reporting corporate sustainability practices or related KPIs and in decision-making processes. Such disorganisation contributed to NAG’s financial and executive shortcomings in urban development, ultimately impeding its ability to fulfil its social objectives for the public community as an SOE.

Previously, the company lacked a corporate SMA system and only had scattered, ineffective management accounting practices focused mainly on performance measurement and control rather than sustainability accounting and management accountability during urban development governance. These traditional practices were internally focused and not used by the national government for external decision-making. Government decision-makers and associated SOEs viewed organisational management accounting reports merely as performance evaluations or variance reports, which played no part in urban development decision-making processes. The significance of management accounting in sustainable urban development diminished until the second Egyptian revolution in 2013…

…Post-2013, with the country’s shift towards new political, military, and governmental visions emphasising corporate sustainability in urban development, management accounting and accountants became integral to the successful SMA systems implemented in SOEs from early 2019. From 2013 to 2019, the public sector and associated SOEs underwent a period of sustainability transition. During this time, numerous structural and organisational reforms were implemented within SOEs, including corporate SMA reforms, to comply with new government mandates for national urban development. Consequently, a corporate SMA system has been established within NAG’s daily management accounting routines. This system is operated through an advanced ERP platform, recognised as NAG’s SMA system. The new system was launched through a collaboration between the SMA committee of NAG and Said Co. for Technology, one of our private-sector financial partners, and it officially went into operation on 4 January 2019.

The SMA system is enhanced by a sophisticated, interconnected ERP platform. Unlike before, this operational platform is dedicated to digitally collecting, monitoring, and reporting NAG’s sustainability performance indicators in urban development. The upgraded system enables the SMA committee’s management accountants to both authenticate the reliability of sustainability KPIs and guarantee their transparency to the public. Corporate sustainability KPIs, previously hidden, are made public, thereby increasing the transparency, governance, and accountability of urban development initiatives overseen by the national government and its SOEs.

Currently, the central government and urban development financial partners such as the IMF require specific sustainability KPIs, making it essential to integrate a corporate SMA system. These KPIs are crucial for maintaining the company’s control environment, risk assessment, monitoring activities, and information and communication regarding sustainability. Unlike before, the SMA committee’s management accountants are now required to ensure corporate compliance with integrity and ethics, evaluate risks and fraud, and implement extensive controls over technology and policies. Additionally, they must ensure the communication of relevant information both internally and externally, conduct ongoing assessments, and identify and report any deficiencies. Hence, in contrast to the pre-SMA system, the role of management accountants has evolved to become a central figure in corporate sustainability within urban development.

Unlike before, NAG’s SMA system has markedly decreased fraud among management accountants in corporate SMA/KPIs reporting. The adoption of a corporate SMA system, coupled with relevant KPIs, has normalised the everyday responsibilities of committee management accountants. This is achieved through a consistent procedural protocol via ERP, thereby tackling the previously observed fraud issues in corporate SMA reporting within past urban development initiatives.

In 2020, ERP aided the SMA committee’s management accountants in incorporating KPI2, which focuses on transparency and stakeholder engagement, into NAG’s SMA system. During this period, the IMF requested an SMA report on the public sector’s SOEs to assess their sustainability practices in urban development. The IMF used the SMA/KPIs report to evaluate the SOEs’ effectiveness in implementing national urban development projects and to decide on their financial allocations. A gap related to KPI2, crucial for accurate corporate sustainability evaluations, was noted in the report by the IMF. As a result, the IMF deferred the financial contributions to the SOEs, including NAG, for about three months until the SMA committee’s accountants refined the SMA framework with KPI2 and presented a revised report to the IMF. This event highlights the importance of implementing an SMA system with pertinent KPIs for well-informed funding decisions and reinforces the role of management accountants, as well as the significance of integrating ERP in corporate sustainability within urban development.

6.2. Local Implementation of a Sustainability Management Accounting System in Urban Development Pressures

NAG’s history of failures and the prior chairwoman’s internal manipulations necessitated intervention by the central government, specifically the public sector ministry, in NAG’s internal operations. This intervention marked the beginning of efforts to halt these failures and fraudulent activities. The government, especially the new public sector minister, has dismissed the former chairwoman and her corrupt associates from their positions. Moreover, they have been sentenced to three years by a government court for embezzling public funds and abusing their official capacities for personal gain, contrary to the collective and societal objectives pursued by the government. This has led to the initiation of corporate sustainability reforms within the ministry and NAG via management accounting.

Traditional management accounting methods have not kept pace with the demands of national urban development financing, the evolving role of management accountants in corporate sustainability, or their involvement in the national government’s decision-making processes. With the intensifying pressures of government financing, our senior management faced challenges with the public sector ministry, particularly as the adoption of government KPIs at the national level became obligatory for SOEs engaged in urban development, including NAG. The senior management opted to transition to a new SMA system that incorporates innovative and previously unused techniques like sustainability risk management, sustainability performance measurement, sustainability financial governance, and sustainability internal control. These novel techniques are designed to complement, not replace, existing management accounting methods such as ratio analysis, variance analysis, and cost analysis, thereby supporting corporate sustainability and decision-making. ERP has enabled the NAG’s SMA committee to integrate various techniques into a unified procedural protocol that aligns with the existing routines of its executive members, thus combatting fraud and corruption in corporate SMA reporting.

The ERP platform has structured the operational framework for an SMA system, incorporating new corporate sustainability practices through various channels. These channels encompass innovative practices in risk management, performance measurement, financial governance, and internal control. On the daily ERP interface, one can view these SMA channels within our operational portal, symbolising the recently implemented daily corporate sustainability practices in urban development that inform government financing decisions.

Sustainability risk management practices empower management accountants to develop appropriate responses and engage employees in risk management. These practices also facilitate the provision of daily reports on the effectiveness of sustainability risk management. This is achieved through daily operational movement reports that the SMA committee delivers to NAG senior management at the end of each working day. Should any potential issues emerge, management accounting strategies are implemented to address them.

Beyond this, with the advent of new financial governance practices, management accountants are instrumental in formulating appropriate financial sustainability strategies and projections. They are responsible for furnishing senior management with daily financial performance reports and engaging with pertinent departments to address any unforeseen financial discrepancies in project budgets. In doing so, management accountants ensure stringent governance and accountability in national urban development financing.

The SMA committee conducts two types of sustainability internal control reports: daily and quarterly. The daily report is dispatched at the close of each workday through the ERP platform to key decision-makers at NAG and the public sector ministry, to assess daily operations and make necessary decisions. ERP extends beyond just the SMA committee’s management accountants; it is an integrated platform that encompasses various parties involved in NAG’s national urban development projects. This includes executive departments at the NAG level and key decision-makers at the NAG and ministry levels, who are equipped to oversee daily sustainability performance and make necessary interventions remotely…

…The quarterly report monitors progress in the company’s internal sustainability control measures over the previous three months, compared to the preceding quarter. This report extends beyond the company’s senior management and the ministry, unlike the daily report which serves corporate governance and accountability. It is also shared with various significant funders and public accountability authorities at the national level, confirming NAG’s dedication to internal control practices for corporate sustainability in urban development.

In 2021, SMA reports indicated a marked improvement in corporate sustainability in the context of national urban development, despite senior management’s apprehensions about the potential sustainability risks posed by COVID-19. This unexpected boost in sustainability performance during the difficult times of the pandemic prompted senior management to provide financial bonuses and extra incentives to employees. The goal was to motivate them to stay resilient and overcome the challenges brought by the pandemic, while still advancing internal sustainability practices amid the pressures of national urban development financing.

Another management accountant, A2, cited another example, saying:

In 2022, amid the aftermath of the pandemic, SMA reports underscored the concerns of management accountants about potential financial sustainability risks facing the company. These concerns stemmed from possible fluctuations in both local and international markets over the next two years. Acting as a warning signal, these concerns led the senior management to increase NAG’s reserves from USD 3 million to USD 3.8 million, aiming to safeguard against the anticipated risks in urban development.

7. Discussion

8. conclusions, 9. implications and future research, author contributions, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Argento, D.; Grossi, G.; Jääskeläinen, A.; Servalli, S.; Suomala, P. Governmentality and performance for the smart city. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2020 , 33 , 204–232. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kurki, M.; Järvenpää, M. Engaging management accountants in corporate sustainability. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2024 , 37 , 100–127. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Albertini, E. The Contribution of Management Control Systems to Environmental Capabilities. J. Bus. Ethics 2019 , 159 , 1163–1180. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schaltegger, S.; Christ, K.L.; Wenzig, J.; Burritt, R.L. Corporate sustainability management accounting and multi-level links for sustainability—A systematic review. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2022 , 24 , 480–500. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pumiviset, W.; Suttipun, M. Sustainability and strategic management accounting: Evidence of green manufacturing in Thailand. Cog. Bus. Manag. 2024 , 11 , 2302794. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vysochan, O.; Hyk, V.; Vysochan, O.; Olshanska, M. Sustainability Accounting: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis. J. Qual. Acc. Succ. 2021 , 22 , 95–102. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• de Oliveira, U.R.; Menezes, R.P.; Fernandes, V.A. A systematic literature review on corporate sustainability: Contributions, barriers, innovations and future possibilities. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2024 , 26 , 3045–3079. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Roy, M.J.; Boiral, O.; Paillé, P. Pursuing quality and environmental performance: Initiatives and supporting processes. Bus. Proc. Manag. J. 2013 , 19 , 30–53. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schaltegger, S. Linking environmental management accounting: A reflection on (missing) links to sustainability and planetary boundaries. Soc. Environ. Account. J. 2018 , 38 , 19–29. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Burritt, R.; Schaltegger, S. Accounting towards sustainability in production and supply chains. J. Br. Account. Rev. 2014 , 46 , 327–343. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bui, B.; Fowler, C.J. Strategic responses to changing climate change policies: The role played by carbon accounting. J. Aust. Account. Rev. 2019 , 29 , 360–375. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, K.H. Carbon accounting for supply chain management in the automobile industry. J. Clean. Product. 2012 , 36 , 83–93. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zou, T.; Zeng, H.; Zhou, Z.; Xiao, X. A three-dimensional model featuring material flow, value flow and organization for environmental management accounting. J. Clean. Product. 2019 , 228 , 619–633. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• ter Bogt, H.J.; Scapens, R.W. Institutions, situated rationality and agency in management accounting: A research note extending the Burns and Scapens framework. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2019 , 32 , 1801–1825. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Burns, J.; Scapens, R.W. Conceptualizing management accounting change: An institutional framework. J. Manag. Account. Res. 2000 , 11 , 3–25. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oliver, C. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Acad. Manag. Rev. J. 1991 , 16 , 145–179. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dillard, J.F.; Rigsby, J.T.; Goodman, C. The making and remaking of organization context: Duality and the institutionalization process. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2004 , 17 , 506–542. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Burawoy, M. The Extended Case Method. Sociol. Theory J. 1998 , 16 , 4–33. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yin, R.K. Case Study Research Design and Methods , 4th ed.; Sage: London, UK, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Alsaid, L.A.Z.A.; Ambilichu, C.A. Performance measurement in urban development: Unfolding a case of sustainability KPIs reporting. J. Account. Emerg. Econ. 2024 , 14 , 48–74. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, S.; Wang, H.; Wang, J. Exploring the effects of institutional pressures on the implementation of environmental management accounting: Do top management support and perceived benefit work? Bus. Strat. Environ. 2019 , 28 , 233–243. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bertz, J.; Quinn, M. Situated rationalities and management control change—An empirical note on key actors, situated rationalities and generalised practices. Qual. Res. Account. Manag. 2022 , 19 , 77–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mitchell, R.K.; Van Buren, H.J., III; Greenwood, M.; Freeman, R.E. Stakeholder inclusion and accounting for stakeholders. J. Manag. Stud. 2015 , 52 , 851–877. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gibassier, D.; Alcouffe, S. Environmental management accounting: The missing link to sustainability? Soc. Environ. Account. J. 2018 , 38 , 1–18. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fuzi, N.M.; Adam, S.; Ramdan, M.R.; Ong, S.Y.Y.; Osman, J.; Kolandan, S.; Ariffin, S.Z.M.; Jamaluddin, N.S.; Abdullah, K. Sustainability Management Accounting and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Role of Environmental Management System. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 14290. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Besharov, M.L.; Smith, W.K. Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Acad. Manag. Rev. J. 2014 , 39 , 364–381. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsaid, L.A.Z.A.; Ambilichu, C.A. The influence of institutional pressures on the implementation of a performance measurement system in an Egyptian social enterprise. Qual. Res. Account. Manag. 2021 , 18 , 53–83. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schaltegger, S.; Csutora, M. Carbon accounting for sustainability and management. Status quo and challenges. J. Clean. Product. 2012 , 36 , 1–16. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsaid, L.A.Z.A. Performance measurement in smart city governance: A case study of an Egyptian city council. J. Account. Emerg. Econ. 2021 , 11 , 395–430. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsaid, L.A.Z.A. Smart city dynamics and multi-level management accounting: Unfolding a case of sustainable enterprise resource planning. Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J. 2022 , 13 , 30–54. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Egypt Vision. Sustainable Development Strategy: Egypt Vision 2030. Cairo, Egypt. 2016. Available online: https://www.greengrowthknowledge.org/national-documents/sustainable-development-strategy-egypt-vision-2030 (accessed on 12 September 2024).
• Ali, M.A. Smart city policy in developing countries: Case study of the new administrative capital in Egypt. J. Public Aff. 2022 , 22 (Suppl. S1), e2774. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Waisová, S. The Tragedy of Smart Cities in Egypt. How the Smart City is Used towards Political and Social Ordering and Exclusion. Appl. Cybersecur. Internet Gov. 2022 , 1 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• NAG. Corporate Sustainability Quarterly ; Unpublished Internal Bulletin; NAG: Cairo, Egypt, 2021. [ Google Scholar ]
• NAG. Corporate Sustainability Quarterly ; Unpublished Internal Bulletin; NAG: Cairo, Egypt, 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Major, M.; Hopper, T. Managers divided: Implementing ABC in a Portuguese telecommunications company. J. Manag. Account. Res. 2005 , 16 , 205–229. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Seal, W. Management accounting and corporate governance: An institutional interpretation of the agency problem. J. Manag. Account. Res. 2006 , 17 , 389–408. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Quinn, M.; Hiebl, M.R.W. Management accounting routines: A framework on their foundations. Qual. Res. Account. Manag. 2018 , 15 , 535–562. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Parker, L.D. Qualitative management accounting research: Assessing deliverables and relevance. J. Crit. Perspect. Account. 2012 , 23 , 54–70. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Parker, L.D.; Northcott, D. Qualitative generalising in accounting research: Concepts and strategies. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2016 , 29 , 1100–1131. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lăzăroiu, G.; Ionescu, L.; Andronie, M.; Dijmărescu, I. Sustainability Management and Performance in the Urban Corporate Economy: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 7705. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hiebl, M.R.W. Management accounting as a political resource for enabling embedded agency. J. Manag. Account. Res. 2018 , 38 , 22–38. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kuruppu, C.; Adhikari, P.; Gunarathna, V.; Ambalangodage, D.; Perera, P.; Karunarathna, C. Participatory budgeting in a Sri Lankan urban council: A practice of power and domination. J. Crit. Perspect. Account. 2016 , 41 , 1–17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grossi, G.; Meijer, A.; Sargiacomo, M. A public management perspective on smart cities: ‘Urban auditing’ for management, governance and accountability. Public Manag. Rev. 2020 , 22 , 633–647. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Alsaid, L.A.Z.A.; Mutiganda, J.C. Sustainability Management Accounting in Urban Development: A Case Study of an Egyptian State-Owned Enterprise. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 8235. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16188235

Alsaid LAZA, Mutiganda JC. Sustainability Management Accounting in Urban Development: A Case Study of an Egyptian State-Owned Enterprise. Sustainability . 2024; 16(18):8235. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16188235

Alsaid, Loai Ali Zeenalabden Ali, and Jean Claude Mutiganda. 2024. "Sustainability Management Accounting in Urban Development: A Case Study of an Egyptian State-Owned Enterprise" Sustainability 16, no. 18: 8235. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16188235

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management: an Australian case study

• Author & abstract
• Related works & more

Corrections

• Janine Hogan
• Sumit Lodhia

Suggested Citation

Download full text from publisher.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser or activate Google Chrome Frame to improve your experience.

What should your sustainability report contain?

Under s296A(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Corporations Act), the sustainability report for a financial year consists of:

• the climate statements for the year;
• any notes to the climate statements; and
• the directors’ declaration about the statements and notes.

Climate statements

Climate statements must comply with the relevant sustainability standards made by the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) under s 336A of the Corporations Act. The AASB is expected to make these mandatory sustainability standards imminently.

Section 296D of the Corporations Act requires that the climate statements and notes for a financial year must together disclose:

• the entity’s material climate-related financial risks and opportunities;
• the entity’s metrics and targets for the financial year relating to climate that are required to be disclosed by the sustainability standards, including in relation to scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions of greenhouse gas; and
• any information about the entity’s governance, strategy, or risk management in relation to these risks, opportunities, metrics and targets.

The specific disclosures required in climate statements are to be determined by the sustainability standards once made.

An entity must disclose information about its climate resilience, as assessed under at least two possible future states (called ‘scenario analysis’). The Corporations Act requires scenario analysis to be carried out using at least two scenarios referable to temperature increases set out in subparagraphs 3(a)(i) and 3(a)(ii) of the Climate Change Act 2022 . The two mandated scenarios are currently:  

• increase in global average temperature of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels; and
• increase in global average temperature well exceeding 2°C above pre-industrial levels (meaning an increase of 2.5°C or higher).

Consolidated reporting

If the accounting standards require the parent of a consolidated entity to prepare consolidated financial statements for a financial year, the parent may elect to prepare a consolidated sustainability report for the year.

Notes to the climate statements

The legislation also provides that the sustainability report must include notes to the climate statements containing:

• any disclosures required by the Minister in relation to the preparation of, or anything included in, the climate statements;
• anything required by the sustainability standards; and
• any other information necessary to ensure that climate statements and notes together meet the content requirements set out in section 296D of the Corporations Act.

No notes to the climate statements are currently required by the Minister or proposed by the AASB under its sustainability standards.

Directors’ declaration

A sustainability report must include a directors’ declaration which is a declaration by the directors of their opinion on whether the contents of the sustainability report are in accordance with the Corporations Act, including that the sustainability report complies with the sustainability standards (once made).

However, for the first three years of the sustainability reporting regime (i.e. from 1 January 2025 to 1 January 2028), this obligation is modified such that directors must provide an opinion only as to whether the entity has taken reasonable steps to ensure the contents of the sustainability report are in accordance with the Corporations Act.

Climate statements for entities with no material climate risks or opportunities

For smaller entities, if there are no material climate-related financial risks or opportunities, the climate statements included in the sustainability report may comprise:

• a statement that there are no material financial risks or opportunities relating to climate for the entity; and
• a statement explaining why this is the case.

This type of climate statement may only be made by entities that:

• are not NGER reporters; and
• fall below the thresholds set out in the table below.

For further information, see Who must prepare a sustainability report?

🇺🇦    make metadata, not war

Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management: an Australian case study

• Janine Hogan
• Sumit Lodhia

Similar works

Research Papers in Economics

This paper was published in Research Papers in Economics .

Having an issue?

Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.

Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management: an Australian case study

Buy article:.

$50.01 + tax ( Refund Policy )

Pressing the buy now button more than once may result in multiple purchases

Authors: Hogan, Janine ;  Lodhia, Sumit

Source: International Journal of Accounting and Information Management , Volume 19, Number 3, 2011, pp. 267-287(21)

Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/18347641111169269

• < previous article
• view table of contents
• next article >
• Supplementary Data

Keywords: Australia ; Corporate image ; Public companies ; Reputation ; Risk management ; Sustainability ; Sustainability reporting

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: September 20, 2011

• Ingenta Connect
• Ingenta DOI
• Latest TOC RSS Feed
• Recent Issues RSS Feed
• Accessibility

Share Content

• Free content
• Partial Free content
• New content
• Open access content
• Partial Open access content
• Subscribed content
• Partial Subscribed content
• Free trial content

• Sustainability reporting and r...
• More details

Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management: an Australian case study

• EndNote - Citavi, Endnote, RefWorks, ...
• Zotero, Mendeley, RefWorks, ...

Sustainability in businesses, corporate social responsibility, and accounting standards: An empirical study

Akisik, Orhan, (2011)

Hogan, Janine, (2011)

Sustainability performance and assurance : influence on reputation

Alon, Anna, (2015)

Sustainability reporting and reputation risk management : an Australian case study